Appeal No. 2006-0742 Page
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,013 8
The examiner concludes that modifying Corazzini to use a wireless transmitter
would provide not only (1) enhanced mobility and (2) enhanced portability of the
control system, but also (3) increased communication distance (Answer, p. 8).
As to claim 21, the examiner states "the tilt mechanism 52 tilts to one
direction if the motor turns in one direction; the tilt mechanism 52 tilts to the other
direction if the motor turns in the other direction; and the tilt mechanism stops if
the motor stops" (Answer, p. 5).
As to claim 30 (Answer, p. 8), the examiner contends that "the number of
power sources does not affect the operation of the device. Therefore, a single
power source (claim 30) or a plurality of power sources (Corazzini) is considered
an obvious design choice."
"With respect to claim 48, Corazzini does not show the detailed structure
of claim 48. However, all elements claimed in claim 48 should be inside the
Corazzini's circuit." [Answer, p. 9.] Specifically, according to the examiner
(Answer, pp. 10-11, right-hand side of comparison chart),
at least there is a circuit (not shown) for actuating the motor
operation, such a circuit may includes [sic] a preamplifier, a [sic] H-
bridge switch, etc [sic] (all not shown) based on the time set by the
time-set switch 64;
* * * * * *
at least there is a comparator switch (an operational amplifier
functioned [sic] as a switch, not shown) for comparing the time from
the clock and the time set by the time-set switch 64;
* * * * * *
once the time from the clock equals to the time set by the time-set
switch 64, the operational amplifier changes its status to activate
the preamplifier and the H-bridge switch to operate and energize
the motor 40 to rotate the structure 44;
* * * * * *
the motor is periodically activated during the setting time and non-
activated all other times.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007